arf2 Re:ORG,KER+ far12

[Dennis Marer]

Hi - just a quick response...

> Sure -- what I am arguing is that we should be free to write our objects 
> in a non-OO language.

Not a problem.  Just look at what an object is, *really*...in C++ a pointer
to a data structure, and all of its calls are normal function calls with
a "hidden" parameter.  Right now I'm writing tons of software for work in
C with an object oriented style.  For example, consider the following:

anObject->function(a,b,c);	/* This is a non-virtual function */

When you look at the code generated, it translates to:

function(anObject,a,b,c);

(Kindof...in the case of multiple inheritance, things are a little more
sticky, as "anObject" must be translated to reference the proper VMT.)

Objects can be written in any language - COBOL or assembly if you like.
They're nothing more than data structures and functions with the details
or the "magic" of calling a function for an object removed from your
sight.  In a non-OO language you must face these details again.

Dennis